New York Criminal Lawyer Blog
Debra Aughenbaugh and Lani J. Aughenbaugh are the plaintiffs in this case. The defendants in the case are Napper Tandy’s of Northport, d/b/a Napper Tandy’s and Parkstown, Inc, d/b/a Napper Tandy’s of Smithtown. The third party plaintiff in the case is Parkstown, Inc. d/b/a Napper Tandy’s of Smithtown. The third party defendants are Matthew Borowski and Phoenix 4 Contracting Inc. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York located in Suffolk County. Judge Ralph F. Costello is overseeing the case.
Case Background
A New York DWI Lawyer said this case involves a personal injury action. Lani J. and Aughenbaugh allegedly sustained injuries from an automobile accident that occurred on Route 25 A on the eleventh of August, 2011. The accident occurred when their vehicle came into contact with a vehicle that was being driven by Matthew Borowski. The vehicle driven by Borowski was owned by Phoenix 4 Contracting.
The accident occurred when Borowski crossed over a double yellow line on the road and hit the car the plaintiffs were in. Lani Aughenbaugh was driving the vehicle at the time and Debra Aughenbaugh was the passenger. The plaintiff Lani Aughenbaugh has not made a personal injury claim, but is making a derivative claim.
The main action of the case was against Napper Tandy’s et al. Napper Tandy’s is a bar located in Smithtown, New York. The claim states that the bar served alcoholic beverages to Matthew Borowski, which violated the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law, section 65.
Napper Tandy’s then began a third party action against both Phoenix 4 Contracting Inc. and Matthew Borowski for indemnification and contribution in the matter.
Napper Tandy’s has motioned for summary judgment in the case that would dismiss the complaint that is being made against them. Napper Tandy’s seeks and order for dismissal based on the failure to state a cause of action. A New York DWI Lawyer said the defendant, Napper Tandy’s states they were not in violation of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law and for this reason they cannot be held liable in this case.
Court Discussion and Decision
In a case for summary judgment prima facie must be shown to prove that there is no triable evidence in the matter. To support their case, Napper Tandy’s has submitted an affirmation from an attorney, a copy of the summons and complaint and a copy of the third party summons and complaint. In addition, they submit a verified and amended bill of particulars and copies of the transcripts from the examinations of Debra Aughenbaugh, Lani Aughenbaugh, and Matthew Borowski.
The plaintiffs have submitted an uncertified copy of misdemeanor information, the affidavit of Michael Lehrer, and an attorney’s affirmation.
After carefully reviewing the facts and the evidence for the case, a https://criminaldefense.1800nynylaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1398130.htmlNassau County DWI Lawyer said the court is ordering that the motion made by the defendant Napper Tandy’s of Smithtown d/b/a Napper Tandy’s and Parkstown Inc. d/b/a Napper Tandy’s of Smithtown for summary judgment regarding the issue of liability is granted. The complaint and the third party complaint is dismissed with prejudice.
The defendant fulfilled prima facie in the matter to show there is no material issues of fact in this particular case.
For individuals that live within the metropolitan area of Manhattan and need legal advice, contact Stephen Bilkis & Associates. We have offices conveniently located throughout the area. You may contact us at any time to set up a free consultation. We will be happy to discuss your legal matter with you and help you determine the best course of legal action.